Primary Menu

Australian Conservation Monitoring Group (ACM Group), is an “Australian Community Managed” organisation founded in 2015 which aims to hold to account the social, ethical and environmental activities of business operating in our country as well as local and federal government and their policies in Australia.

While monitoring various environmental issues and bringing our own voice to the table on behalf of ordinary Australians we also aim to teach ordinary, every day people how they can help to have a positive outcome on the beautiful land in which they live and on their own lives.

What do we mean when we say we are an Australian Community Managed Group? We mean that we are local members of the community who look at issues affecting the conservation of Australian flora and fauna without outside influence and duress. We aim to provide an objective, though Australian interest focused, lens through which members of the public can get another side of the story as to what is going on with the conservation of this beautiful country’s unique flora, fauna and natural beauty.

What are the ACM Group core objectives and focuses?

To improve the environmental literacy of our great nation and its peoples so we have much to look forward to in the future and something to pass to our kids and grand kids.

Providing easy to digest information on large projects which could affect our environment in a positive or negative way. We believe in sharing good news!

Give advice on fun and family centric projects which can be done at home and can involve the whole family and are especially fun for kids!

Australia is growing in popularity attracting quite a number of both local and foreign investors alike. A good contributing factor to this is with the great ambience and setting with a good number of attractions and locales. This is the reason why Australia attracts a lot of tourists and visitors alike all throughout the year. With that being said, a huge number of individuals fear that Australia will not be able to attract new investors in the near future with their current environment situation. Let us look at environmental news & events around Sydney & Australia.

There is indeed a cause for concern with regards to Australia’s environment news & happenings. Reports have shown that Australia ranked worst among G20 when it comes to action on climate change. It should be noted that The G20 (or G-20 or Group of Twenty) is an international forum for the governments and central bank governors from 20 major economies. It was founded in 1999 with the aim of studying, reviewing, and promoting high-level discussion of policy issues pertaining to the promotion of international financial stability. The organization seeks to address issues that go beyond the responsibilities of any one organization.

G20 comprises of 19 individual countries which include Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The European Union is also included in the list totaling to a complete number of 20.

Based on the report, Australia is the only country to receive a rating of ‘very poor’ in a majority of categories in Climate Transparency scorecard. Adding insult to injury is that Australia was given the worst possible rating of “very poor” for its performance on emissions trends, carbon intensity, share of renewables in its energy supply and overall climate policy. In other aspects such as energy intensity, share of coal in energy supply and electricity emissions intensity, Australia was rated as “poor” as well.

One of the main contributing to Australia’s terrible performance is that the country remains as one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases with its per capita pollution exceeding all other G20 nations. A new global report argues that Australia is among the worst laggards, and the world’s 20 largest economies need to increase their 2030 climate commitments six-fold to keep within the two-degree warming curb agreed at the Paris summit.

This in turn led to a number of organizations urging G20 to make the necessary changes and action to avoid damaging the environment even further. By introducing a price on carbon and commit more money to clean energy investment, Climate Transparency now wants all G20 countries to set out a plan to decarbonise their economies by 2050.

There is a lot of changes that needs to be done in order to improve the environment situation that is happening in Australia. It is good to hear that there exist a number of eco groups that helps spread the much needed information about the environment. These individuals also monitor the social, ethical and environmental activities of business operating in the country as well as local and federal government and their policies in Australia. We encourage others to join with the eco movement as well keeping our country a suitable place for our children to live in.

Is the third world not only poor but are its inhabitants also negligent when it comes to cleaning up after themselves? Is poverty enough of an excuse when it comes to polluting your own environment? On a recent excursion to an island in Asia I was astounded to see how dirty, messy and crapped out were the streets of the city I walked around. Where was the civic pride and the basic human responsibility to clean up your shit? Education is obviously a big part of environmentalism and many people in these circumstances need to be taught how important it is.

Surviving and making a buck is not the only prerequisite for success; keeping pollution out of the atmosphere in all its forms is equally important. Many of the very poor in big Asian cities have migrated to the city from villages in the surrounding countryside; but they are so marginalised they must feel powerless to affect change. Small villages are usually much better maintained in comparison to the slums and ghettoes of huge metropolises. Gridlocked streets are a haze of carbon monoxide pollution. Gutters stink with human and animal refuse. Waterways are similarly clogged with rotting and floating garbage.

Trashing Asia: Pollution Damaging the Environment

People need to be educated and empowered so that they can take some civic pride in their city. Politicians must be held accountable for the areas they represent; which would combat some of the vast corruption that holds these nations back. Many of these countries are receiving huge amounts of international aid from wealthy western nations like the United States and Australia; but no one seems to be accountable. Self-interest among politicians and civil servants in these places ensures that positive change occurs at a snail’s pace.

Air pollution in Asia is rife and the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimate that more than two million people die from it every year worldwide. Particulate Matter (PM) is particularly hazardous to humans and it causes some nine percent of lung cancer deaths around the globe. Asia suffers from PM more than most continents, with Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal experiencing very high levels in their atmospheres. Air pollution in China is bad, as we know, but their PM levels are moderate in comparison to the Indian nations. South East Asian countries, likewise, have air pollution problems but their PM levels remain moderate. Education and empowerment are the only things that will improve the state of these nations in terms of their environmental health.

When I was a kid I lived in an asbestos house built by my father and his friends. I remember playing with bits of asbestos as a child, burning them on fires until they exploded and stuff like that. This was in the nineteen seventies in Perth, Western Australia; it seems that even then many people did not know the dangers this stuff presented. Of course, Wittenoom, the famous ‘blue sky mining’ town is located in WA, in the Pilbara. It is now a ghost town with signs all around the town warning visitors of the potential dangers of asbestos. Asbestos fibres can become embedded in the lungs and then can be slow to develop into serious and often terminal lung diseases. Breathing difficulties are caused by a thickening of the lung’s pleura and this makes breathing painful and difficult.

Asbestos has been with humanity since the Stone Age apparently. There were asbestos mines in Greece and northern Europe around 5000 BCE. Egyptian Pharaohs were wrapped in asbestos cloth around 2200 BCE. Herodotus tells us, in 456 BCE, that the Greeks were wrapping their dead in asbestos cloth prior to cremation; which seems somewhat self-defeating. Asbestos mine workers were getting lung disease in Roman times, according to Pliny the Elder in 100 CE. During the Crusades the Christian forces catapulted burning bags of tar wrapped in asbestos at the heathen enemy in 1095 CE. The Mongols wore asbestos clothing into battle in 1280 CE. In 1924 the first diagnosis of a woman who died from lung disease after working with asbestos for twenty years is made. A later study reveals that 25% of asbestos workers have a asbestos related lung disease. Asbestos is in WWII gas masks. From 1940 to 1970 asbestos is found in hair dryers, electric blankets, plaster, gutters, building products and brake plates. Asbestos is the biggest killer of tradespeople in the UK; still today with some twenty dying every week.

Asbestos: An Environmental and Human Health Disaster

In Australia, we were the biggest users of asbestos in the world per capita; with one third of all homes containing some asbestos. Homes built prior to 1980 are very likely to have some asbestos in the building materials used. Homes built after 1990 are unlikely to contain any asbestos material. Around five hundred men and one hundred women develop the disease mesothelioma every year in Australia. Asbestos related diseases have killed many thousands of Australians over the years.

I have fond memories of Wanneroo, and especially Yanchep but some of the locals are causing a bit of a bother there nowadays if news reports are to be believed.

The locals in question? Some 3,500 kangaroos who are leaving their high life at the Yanchep Sun City Country Club behind so that they can move into the path of neighbouring homes.

Supposedly Wanneroo council has tried to get the WA Environment Minister, the Hon Albert Jacob, to step in as the country club has begun moving the kangaroos along as they’re destroying the greens of the golf course.

A petition begun by Yanchep local Kelsey Burns has already attracted 1,800 signatures with Wanneroo mayor Tracy Roberts joining the fight and asking for “quick and effective” action.

The problem is that the kangaroos have begun migrating from the national park into residential areas and were becoming trapped by the residential spaces surrounding the park.

This creates problems as kangaroos then interact with domestic pets and also spill out onto roadways where they can cause traffic problems.

Ms Roberts said the council had asked the country club to allow the kangaroos onto the course from the eastern side towards Yanchep National Park and were erecting signs to warn motorists about the rogue kangaroos.

One other problem is that the amount of bushland left in the area is relatively sparse, and could soon be destroyed to make way for more residential houses. Options have even been suggested of moving them on, relocated to another national park.

The Sun City Country Club has responded to inquiries reminding people that they had been on site for over 40 years and opened at a time when residential developments were minimal and kangaroos were able to roam freely in natural bushland.

With recent land development projects the kangaroos have been pushed towards the golf course.

They’ve also had a problem with vandals using vehicles to knock down existing fences which has caused severe damage to the course, ACM Group would like to make clear that these vandals were obviously not kangaroos!

Albert Jacob, the Environment Minister has responded, saying the management of the roos was the responsibility of the Council, though he has asked that he continue to be informed about the issue in future.

Great for serious discussion or just something clever to bring up over dinner, these are our 5 top environmental news stories happening right now …

1. WA Environmental Defender’s Office Slams Biodiversity Conservation Bill
The WA Environmental Defender’s Office has slammed Albert Jacob’s biodiversity bill claiming that it is a giant step back and claiming that the proposed removal of the threat of jail time for harming highly threatened species was disturbing.
Meanwhile Environment Minister Albert Jacob has described changes to the Wildlife Conservation act as a “Holy Grail” of legislation change of every previous government going right back to the 1980s.

2. CSIRO Cuts Are Causing A ‘Real Crisis’ For Environmental Science
Deep staffing cuts mean that the CSIRO is having to axe 350 jobs mainly from the Land and Water division.
The move has drawn international condemnation from scientists in Australia and abroad led by members of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US.

3. Environment Minister Greg Hunt Wins Best Minister In The World Award
Interestingly not an Onion story, Greg Hunt really did win the best minister in the world award during a ceremony in the UAE. Not a joke. Apparently he has some ground breaking policies once you get past the whole Adani/Abbott Point fiasco.

4. Climate Change Affecting Trans-Atlantic Flight Times
Climate change has been shown to have increased the speed of the jet stream, a strong wind blowing west to east across the Atlantic ocean.
Currently the journey takes an hour longer when travelling from Europe to the US. It can also cause bumpier flights with more turbulence and decrease the amount of weight an aircraft can carry.

5. Concerns English Children Are Not Spending Enough Time Engaging With Nature
A 2 year study funded by the government has found that more than one in nine British youth had not spent any time in a natural environment in the last twelve months. This includes parks, forests and beaches.

The ABC recently ran a story called 7 ways environmentalists have had it wrong (which you can read here http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2015/05/18/4220842.htm). ‘Ecomodernists’ who are mentioned in the article as being some of the most noted environmental thinkers of today have put together “An Ecomodernist Manifesto” which purports to explain to environmentalists 7 things they’ve been doing wrong all this time.

At first hearing of this we were pretty outraged, here we are trying to look after the environment and you have this group come along and start tarring and feathering environmentalists. However we hadn’t even read the manifesto yet and so we thought we should cool down, have a read and let you know what all the fuss was about, and importantly our opinion at ACM Group on this ecomodernist viewpoint.

1.Human Technology Is Bad

If so, then why have so many of us gotten behind solar power and energy efficient lighting etc. They were big schemes here in Australia, not without fault but people genuinely tried and got behind the idea. I don’t know of any environmentalists who got behind a human technology is bad banner, just that we can always do it better.

2. Humans Need Connection With Nature

They say if humans don’t have a connection with nature they won’t destroy it. If you’re using electricity in Australia and not going outside, guess what? You’re still directly affecting nature via coal mining and pollution. Humans should definitely have a connection to nature, it’s a natural part of us.

3. Humans Are Part Of The Ecosystem

By trying to use land to survive we destroy it apparently, part of the ecosystem or not. Ecomodernists argue that if we make nature worthless we won’t try and use the land, so the last pristine areas on the planet will be areas no one bothers to go to because there’s nothing there we can use. We don’t really want to comment.

4. Unlimited Energy Is A Bad Thing

“Many environmentalists have long argued that we need to reduce our consumption, rather than find new ways to feed it.”

While we agree reduced consumption is a good idea, there are a slew of innovative new energy producing technologies being developed that we really need to develop. Wind, solar and excitingly fusion power are all on the cards as Germany has gone through the first tests of a working fusion power reactor.

5. Nuclear Energy Is Bad

This is a rather divisive concept in the environmental field, on the one hand we can create relatively clean power using nuclear technology, on the other hand when accidents happen the ecological effects, let alone the cost of suffering is tremendous. I think in the future environmentalists and ecomodernists alike will be able to get behind fusion power and we can drop the nuclear debate altogether.

6. Genetically Modified Food Is Bad

ACM Group has done a lot of research around the GM food debate and we hold what is probably a bit of a controversial view. Genetically modified food is good! What’s that you said? Hear us out.

If we as a species find a species of grain which can raise food production from the same amount of plants we think it’s a fantastic idea in order to be able to feed the worlds growing population.

What’s not cool is using GM products in an aggressive business sense, creating variations of stock that die within a generation or holding people to stringent business deals in order to be able to obtain seeds.

GM food has the opportunity to create fantastic benefits for the world, the business side of it however is pretty questionable!

7. Thinking Environmentalists Are Peak Everything

It’s been said for years we are going to meet peak oil soon, peak food, peak this, peak that etc.

It is true we haven’t yet reached the limits of what we can do technologically, and we’re going to continue to grow. People are not going to stop taking oil out of the ground, so we need to keep pushing technology to reduce the footprint when we do do these things.

At the end of the day, labels cause division, environmentalists, ecomodernists, it doesn’t matter we’re thinking along the same lines and maybe we need to talk and consider the different options. We should put together some of the best ideas from both camps, the connection with nature and the technological race to save the planet working hand in hand.

The North Wambo coal mine, a combined open-cut and underground mine 30 kilometres to the west of Singleton in the Hunter Valley region has come under serious scrutiny from the Environmental Protection Authority following a burst dam on site which could have serious negative environmental effects.

Approved only last year for a modification allowing the mine to develop an additional longwall panel, the mine is already running into trouble, which is especially concerning as the approval required tough new rules to control the environmental impact of the mine.

The most intriguing part of the whole story though is the fact that the environmental regulators are not only demanding to know how the dam wall collapsed, but also how it took an entire week for the problem to be reported.

Peabody Energy, the coal mining giant behind the mine explained how this could happen in quite simple terms…

The miner told the NSW EPA that they had only learned of the incident EARLIER THAT DAY, in a statement issued by the EPA.

So somehow no one noticed that a dam wall, with the potential to hold up to 3 million litres of sediment and waste had collapsed at this site for AN ENTIRE WEEK?

The water released from the dam is believed to be mainly mixed with soil, sand, rocks and grass with no known toxins present at this point. However it’s not currently clear just how extensive the breach was as workers could not reach the affected wall for several days due to security concerns. Also of course there’s the issue of the very late discovery of the problem.

It’s also a reminder of the dangers we face when allowing coal mining operators to operate on prime agricultural land as mentioned by Jeremy Buckingham of the Greens party.

Australia is a part of several developed nations around the world at the UN climate talks in Paris pushing the developing world to consider greater responsibility regarding billions in funding required to combat world-wide warming and successfully adapt to the challenge of climate change.

Divisions involving rich and poor nations around the world over who should claim responsibility pertaining to “climate finance” – a ”promise” manufactured in Copenhagen in order to “mobilise” $100 billion each year from 2020 to assist developing nations around the world – were expected to be on the list of key sticking points throughout the two days of negotiations.

The absolute goal of the Paris conference is to be able to reach a greater agreement in order to limit world-wide warming to 2°C above pre-industrial amounts by 2030. Nevertheless, there are going to be no steps forward unless countries can get consensus on a selection of issues which includes funding, proving “loss in addition to damage” aid for countries afflicted by global warming and reviews of national carbon decline targets in the lead up to Paris.

Emerging economies including India and also South Africa, which chairs the principle “G77 as well as China” bloc regarding developing nations around the world, have extended their long argued claim that richer countries should cover a lot of the cost regarding reducing greenhouse gas emissions in addition to protecting susceptible nations due to rising marine levels, extreme weather and also other effects regarding global warming. They make this claim because they consider that richer nations around the world caused the situation to begin with.

Gambia’s Pa Ousman Jarju, who’s going to be the chair of the 48-strong Least Developed Countries group, warned the situation was regarded as being of “paramount importance” and that a “clear pathway” was needed to ensure the Copenhagen responsibilities would be fulfilled by richer nations. “Finance is the bedrock in this agreement” he mentioned.

One onlooker said that while the G77 ended up being frustrated with Australia on this issue, other developed nations such as the EU bloc had been “more constructive”.

Developing nations around the world argue larger nations including China and Brazil ought to take some responsibility pertaining to funding given they will account for a greater amount of world-wide emissions.

Chinese Leader Xi Jinping utilized his speech on the opening day of the conference in order to argue that the richest nations around the world should raise financing they supply to less well off nations. Individually, China attempted to play a constructive, leading role around Paris by committing $US3. 1 billion to assist poorer nations around the world finance the transition to a low-carbon economy.

Australia says it’s going to use the new gig because co-chair of a global finance for environment change actions in less well off countries to speed up the generation of dollars for .

The federal government of Australia will co-chair the Green Climate Fund with South Africa, having a year ago pledged $200 million over approximately four years to developing economies.

Environmental Minister Greg Hunt said Australia’s priority will be the quick circulation of funds, which had been held up because of a lack of “decisive capability”.

Australia’s co-chair appointment came as a surprise for some, after previous prime minister Tony Abbott criticised the fund as being a “Bob Brown bank” but on an international scale.

Climate change is a very controversial topic, constantly on the agenda of businesses and indeed governments worldwide. It is considered, or not considered often to much chagrin, in major national and international agreements.
There’s a back and forth in the scientific community regarding the existence of climate change, it’s real, it’s not real, it will bring about catastrophic weather changes, it will have no effect on world weather systems.
All of this can be quite confusing, especially as an average person without much access to data and little or no scientific background. It makes it even more confusing that key scientists who voice their opinions on the issue can be either for or against, with either side calling the other side out for taking grants, which means extra money in short, in order to support one argument or another.
So what to do in a world where our government can’t agree on the existence of climate change and we can’t rely on scientists to give us unbiased information?

In our view it’s pretty simple, is climate change real?

It doesn’t matter!

Let’s look at this issue again, climate change comes about because of pollution supposedly, the more pollution the more climate change.

Well guess what?

More pollution also simply means more pollution and I don’t know of anyone who can argue pollution is a good thing. We should be looking at reducing pollution. Pretty simple.
When we look at the issues surrounding climate change and realise that they’re actually issues relating to pollution everything seems to become a lot clearer.

Think about this in relation to industry and business, the most efficient businesses are the ones with a serious competitive advantage, versus a dirty, dingy old factory or power plant somewhere.

Wouldn’t Australian businesses prefer to be the most efficient in the world? Wouldn’t they prefer to have a competitive edge? Introducing measures to reduce energy consumption often directly relate to savings when it comes to the bottom line.

At the end of the day, it serves all Australians when we reduce pollution, the right and the left, if we want to preserve our way of life, it just has to be done.

We will be exploring this controversial issue in more depth in the future, but we just wanted to take the time to give an interesting spin on this idea, just as food for thought.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is the largest trade agreement of all time for Australians, and as such presents a number of benefits and challenges not just to us but also to the 12 nations involved. Representing 40% of trade in the global market the countries involved Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam will remove 98% of trade tariffs between them.

However a number of analysts and specialists have spoken out regarding provisions contained therein, and rather than read through 30 chapters of legal speak, we thought we would go ahead and analyse their thoughts on your behalf and talk about some aspects of what is contained in the TPP.

We will also be relying on what experts have said in relation to the TPP in order to expound a very balanced view of the situation.

Intellectual property law professor at Queensland University of Technology, Matthew Rimmer has said the chapter on environmental regulations is lacking detail.

“It seems to me remarkable that the environmental chapter in the Trans-Pacific Partnership doesn’t even mention the phrase climate change. It’s kind of like Voldemort in the Harry Potter series, it’s a taboo phrase in the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”

Australia’s trade minister Andrew Robb retorted that the TPP does not need to address climate change as it is in fact a trade agreement.

“This is not a climate change policy. It’s not an agreement to do with climate change, it’s a trade agreement.”

Many people however question this kind of sentiment. Should we actually be tying environmental protection and climate change to our industrial and business needs? From the perspective of this writer it’s been made clear that without enforcing environmental protections in a robust manner alongside industry it just seems that environmental needs are ignored in favour of profits. What do you think?

Another concern is being presented in the form of ISDS provisions, or Investor-State Dispute Settlements. This allows foreign investors, i.e. businesses, to sue foreign governments if legislation is introduced which can harm their potential future profits.

Think about that for a second, a foreign company can sue the Australian government if laws are introduced which could harm their bottom line. It seems pretty crazy, however it has happened in the past and is happening currently. In fact due to a prior ISDS provision introduced in a treaty between Australia and Hong Kong, the tobacco company Phillip Morris is currently suing the Australian government for a sum which some have estimated to be in the billions. We would like to highlight the fact that this is completely legal at this stage and will now apply on a much broader scale.

How does this affect the environment though? Tobacco packaging is a separate issue.

Well we’d be interested to know what you think of this as a case study. Though this didn’t take place under the TPP, the provisions seem to be similar at this time.

A claim was brought about by an American resources company against a moratorium on oil and gas exploration in Quebec, Canada.

When that moratorium was announced in 2011, the Lone Pine Resources Company had acquired a permit to extract gas from beneath the St Lawrence River.

When the permit was revoked, it was claimed the Quebec government was breaching the ISDS provision in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and the Canadian government is now being sued for around $US230 million for that case alone.

There are currently 8 cases outstanding against the Canadian government with damages claimed at somewhere around the 6 billion mark.

Do we think it’s a good idea that Australia is open to this kind of system, where private tribunals can effectively decide outcomes against Australian legislation?

It seems like our sovereign rights as a country are being encroached upon from where we are sitting, but as with any legal speak it’s open for interpretation. We’re very open to hearing any feedback from both sides of the community regarding the TPP and hope to bring more updates and opinions to you as they come to light.

Linc Energy is facing what is to be expected to be one of the nation’s largest environmental prosecutions after the most extensive investigation in the Environment Department’s history.

A court has heard how workers at Linc Energy’s underground coal gasification project were warned to drink milk and also to eat yoghurt to protect their stomachs from being burnt by acidic gases.

Prosecuting barrister, Ralph Devlin QC, also presented evidence that despite workers suffering from a myriad of gas exposure related symptoms, work was not stopped, this even despite physical notification of tar-smelling gas bubbling from the ground around a well.

Workers were provided gas detecting equipment, some of which sounded the alarm as soon as workers left their onsite accommodation.

Mr Devlin said that work on the site should have been stopped, but didn’t causing wilful and reckless environmental harm to the surrounding environment. The gases being released have been variously described as potentially cancer-causing, explosive and capable of causing asphyxiation.

In an interesting turn of events a key state government witness has backed down from claims the controversial gas plant had caused widespread soil contamination under cross-examination from defence barrister Robert Bain QC. It was conceded that it is impossible given the circumstances to directly link the high soil acidity found on site and in the Hopeland area to the activities of Linc Energy.

The hearing is continuing at this time with a final verdict originally expected for Friday the 20th of November expected to be pushed back following an expected request for extension by the defence.

Hopes of finding survivors are fading according to Governor Fernando Pimental following two waste water dams bursting in Minas Gerais state, Brazil .

Residents in areas affected said they were not warned once the dams burst and were only able to escape by running to higher ground upon hearing the noise of the potentially poisonous thick red sludge heading in their direction.

Brazilian mining group Samarco who operated the BHP Billiton and Vale owned mine said they were unaware of any Brazilian laws requiring an emergency alarm during an instance of dam failure.

The mud has caused destruction up to 40km away from the dams with fears that iron ore residue in the waste water could pose a health risk.

The boss of BHP Billiton is visiting the location with dozens still missing in the disaster zone. Shares in the mining multinational continuing to fall, perhaps rightly so in the wake of such a disaster. Authorities are still struggling to understand the cause of the disaster and are working on multiple theories including tremors reported in the local area prior to the dams failing.

28 people have been listed as missing including 13 mine workers, at the time of writing it’s believed that those missing are unlikely to be found alive despite 4 bodies being recovered so far.

The mud has continued to spread and it’s feared that mine tailings could enter the water supply of neighbouring state of Espirito Santo.

Samarco has been suspended from operating following the incident with critics calling for a review of the regulation surrounding mining in Brazil, one of the country’s leading sources of export revenue. At this stage the dam is likely to be shut for a number of years.

We wanted to share this to show the damage that can be done when regulations don’t seem to be up to scratch and just how damaging it can be to the human population and not just the environment when these kinds of enterprises are not correctly managed.

Keep up the fight to make sure that Australian companies are not getting around regulations or self-imposing soft regulatory requirements in order to give themselves bigger profits or we could see an incident like this!